Jeff Skinner rumors, trade and buyout speculation swirling

[Thorny]

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Pretty much it comes down to, does the coach want him here on a lower line or does he want him out the door (ala Satan in '05).

If after talking to the other players and staff, Ruff thinks that Skinner would be a distraction from/ detriment to what they are trying to accomplish or would become a room cancer if he isn't going to be on the top line (and all the tea leaves indicate he will not be on the top line) then he is not going to be here even if they don't officially fill his slot.  Punting Miro with no widely recognized backfill for his production (though Briere was in house and should've been expected to replace his PP scoring if not the ES/EN) was one of the moves that lead to the best 2 year stretch in Sabres hockey in well over 30 years.

Personally, have preferred that they keep Skinner this year rather than punt him to get him fully off the books 5 years from now rather than 6 unless they have something in the works that needs his money for this season now, but wouldn't be upset if they did simply walk away from him.  Should Quinn be able to stay healthy all year, a lot of Skinner's production gets replaced right there.  

We need both 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

I still believe that Skinner is capable of scoring 25 goals on a third line if the other parts of the line are solid players. If you add Benson and bring in a credible 2/3 C for the third line, it's not out of the real of reality that he can score at least 25 goals. If you play him on the second PP unit, I'm comfortable in projecting that he can score 25-30 or maybe 35 goals. 

My preference would be to play him on the top line with Tage and Tuch. (Obviously, this is a minority view here.)  That would move JJ down to a line with Cozens and Quinn. I find that configuration very attractive. As you adroitly put out our roster right now is incomplete. That's the issue. What players is the GM going to bring in? That's the most consequential issue that we are facing this offseason. 

It's more likely than not that Skinner will not finish out the rest of his extended contract in Buffalo. That doesn't mean that he can't be a positive contributor this upcoming season. 

Except, it's not about goals. It's about changing the team dynamics and the culture this team currently doesn't have. 

5 hours ago, Gatorman0519 said:

The never ending dysfunction of this franchise is astonishing. They are going to have to eat that contract for 6 years if I’m reading it right? Yikes. Singing that guy to 9 mill a year was a joke to begin with. 🤦‍♂️

Unless you look at this as the moment they finally right the ship and start doing things properly. 

For the moment, until proven wrong, I have to look at the return of Ruff as the moment we start to get back on track. If Ruff wants Skinner gone, get him gone, simple as that. There must be no compromise. Ruff must get what he wants. If Ruff cannot fix this we are well and truly f'd. 

[Taro T]

Just now, Thorny said:

We need both 

In a vacuum, absolutely.  And, again, would prefer they keep him on the roster even if they add say Kane and Danault along with a 4th liner.  

But, IF Ruff sees Skinner in the light that Drury saw Satan OR in the light that Smerlas and Devlin were on the '89 Bills (the leaders of the team that were long in tooth and kept that team from being Kelly & Smith's when it should've been Kelly & Smith's team), then am fine with him going away even if his replacement isn't obviously coming in through the door.  Mittelstadt and Skinner were 2 guys the young guys gravitated towards; maybe management wants them gravitating towards others instead?  (Not saying management does, just literally speculating "out loud.")

There were MANY people that were upset when all those 3 guys left town respectively, but it turned out to be the best move in the long run (realize there will be push back on the Smerlas move as Jeff Wright was tremendously undersized (but the D never becomes Smith's and Talley's and Biscuit's if Fred is still there IMHO), but the Bills walked away from Parella too a couple of years later and don't see either move as the reason the Bills never won a Super Bowl).  Will trust in whichever decision they make on what to do with Skinner.

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Lindy likes to have at least one solid two-way player on every line so we don't know what his first line will be, even if they can't or don't move Skinner, I don't see him being a Lindy first line player.  

It sure sounds like Lindy took the job with the promise of getting a major input into the roster.  

I do share your concern on getting rid of Skinner and then not bringing in a first line winger.   I hope they are not going to just hand a first line position to Quinn or Peterka and then bring in Kulich or Rosen for the 2nd or 3rd line.   

If they move on from Skinner they need to replace him with an NHL player.  They still need to replace Mitts too.  We know that Lindy likes situational players, he referred to them as "tools".   He said he wants to win key face-offs, to have a shut down line, to play a grittier game, and to have a few players that will keep the other team from getting out of line.  In other words it sounds like we could be bringing in 5 or 6 new players.  

As for Skinner scoring 25+ on the 3rd line with Benson on the other wing?   That would require a 3C that is capable of being a 2C and it is also asking a lot of Benson who will play next season at only 19 years old.   

One of the perceptive points you make that I agree with is that when talking about any player movement from this roster requires answering the question of who is going to be brought in. Right now, we don't know. We should know fairly soon. Also, our positions coincide on whether the 2/3C position is going to be addressed. That is going to be a critical issue. 

You make another interesting observation as to whether Skinner is a type of Lindy player. Probably not. But that doesn't mean that if he is kept that he can't find a way to maximize his asset (goal scoring) and put him in a position to minimize his liabilities. Transactions are starting to happen around the league. TBD.

 

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, Taro T said:

In a vacuum, absolutely.  And, again, would prefer they keep him on the roster even if they add say Kane and Danault along with a 4th liner.  

But, IF Ruff sees Skinner in the light that Drury saw Satan OR in the light that Smerlas and Devlin were on the '89 Bills (the leaders of the team that were long in tooth and kept that team from being Kelly & Smith's when it should've been Kelly & Smith's team), then am fine with him going away even if his replacement isn't obviously coming in through the door.  Mittelstadt and Skinner were 2 guys the young guys gravitated towards; maybe management wants them gravitating towards others instead?  (Not saying management does, just literally speculating "out loud.")

There were MANY people that were upset when all those 3 guys left town respectively, but it turned out to be the best move in the long run (realize there will be push back on the Smerlas move as Jeff Wright was tremendously undersized (but the D never becomes Smith's and Talley's and Biscuit's if Fred is still there IMHO), but the Bills walked away from Parella too a couple of years later and don't see either move as the reason the Bills never won a Super Bowl).  Will trust in whichever decision they make on what to do with Skinner.

The comparison between Skinner and Satan don't resonate with me. A couple of years ago, Granato spoke on WGR about Skinner handling his demotion when Krueger was the coach. Clearly, Skinner didn't fit the model of a player he preferred. His minutes and role were severely diminished. The former HC said that after being demoted, Skinner was one of the hardest practice players on the team. The point I'm making is that he's not the type of person who will become a negative influence on the team even when as a player his role is diminished. 

[K-9]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

I still believe that Skinner is capable of scoring 25 goals on a third line if the other parts of the line are solid players. If you add Benson and bring in a credible 2/3 C for the third line, it's not out of the real of reality that he can score at least 25 goals. If you play him on the second PP unit, I'm comfortable in projecting that he can score 25-30 or maybe 35 goals. 

My preference would be to play him on the top line with Tage and Tuch. (Obviously, this is a minority view here.)  That would move JJ down to a line with Cozens and Quinn. I find that configuration very attractive. As you adroitly put out our roster right now is incomplete. That's the issue. What players is the GM going to bring in? That's the most consequential issue that we are facing this offseason. 

It's more likely than not that Skinner will not finish out the rest of his extended contract in Buffalo. That doesn't mean that he can't be a positive contributor this upcoming season. 

Somebody mentioned that Lindy likes at least one solid two way player on every line and imo, that’s Benson on line one with Tage and Tuch or line two with Cozens and Quinn. Benson is gonna bring his 200 foot game no matter where he plays, but he has offensive chops as well, which is why I see him more as a top six winger. 

Edited June 20 by K-9

[JohnC]

15 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Somebody mentioned that Lindy likes at least one solid two way player on every line and imo, that’s Benson on line one with Tage and Tuch or line two with Cozens and Quinn. Benson is gonna bring his 200 foot game no matter where he plays, but he has offensive chops as well, which is why I see him more as a top six winger. 

I agree with you that Benson is the type of player who can play on any of the top three lines. Mitts was a similar player that he could fit in at C or W on any of the top three lines. That's an invaluable attribute to have. It's going to be intriguing to see if Benson can make a quantum leap in his second year. He's a youngster who has a mature game. How can anyone not like him?

[Jorcus]

My concern about ejecting Skinner is who will replace him on left wing. Peterka is listed as a right winger who is playing left wing. Then you have Benson, Greenway and the unsigned Girgensons. I still have no idea why Kane would sign in Buffalo given past issues but would he play any more defense than Skinner would? Also he is listed as a right winger. Maybe left and right are more interchangeable than I think they are but it seems like it could be an issue. 

If you tell me they are clearing space with Skinner to get Gentzel or Debrusk I wouldn't argue with that but that seems like a very long shot. Skinners contract is like owning a timeshare you can't get out of it without losing big so maybe the best thing to do is just use it until it goes away. 

Edited June 20 by Jorcus

[Doohickie]

12 minutes ago, Jorcus said:

Skinners contract is like owning a timeshare you can't get out of it without losing big so maybe the best thing to do is just use it until it goes away. 

...except that if your new wife/head coach can't stand the timeshare/player you might have to just eat the loss.

[Crusader1969]

20 hours ago, Thorny said:

You’re finally breaking 

Are we really going to be the youngest team in da league again? Has….anyone ever perused the playoff rate of the “youngest team in the league”? 

You say “BUT on da youngest team in da league” as if THAT’S not the flaw 

Again you are assuming that they don't spend the money they save on Skinner on vets who "fit" what they want as a bottom 6 player 

[Thorny]

3 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

Again you are assuming that they don't spend the money they save on Skinner on vets who "fit" what they want as a bottom 6 player 

That would address the issue of being da youngest team in da leaguueee though so I’d be good with that 

we don’t want to be the youngest team in the league next year. It’s uncommon for the youngest team in the league to make the playoffs - that’s not an anomaly that’s proven data 

Should be noted that what Adams most likely does given the added cap space is “explore all options” to the tune of questionable conversion 

- - - 

We should see a big offseason this year with several competent experienced players brought in. We needed that before we traded Mitts and we needed it before we entertained buying out Skinner. Go ahead, buy out your 3rd best goal scorer after trading your best centre. I’ve absolutely advocated for addressing fit, regardless of if it was those specific players. I feel like dudacek would have you believe if you advocate for change and get it you aren’t allowed to question the means, but I don’t agree. But I’m also withholding judgment: the theory of addressing fit makes sense 

We need a big offseason and even more so now upfront without Casey and potentially Skinner. I’m game, I will praise Kevyn if he takes a few noteworthy swings - one thing that need not apply though, ever going forward is “who even was there?” if the results aren’t adequate

it’s all on the line now for KA this offseason 

Edited June 20 by Thorny

[mjd1001]

The more I think of this, I can't come off of the fact that I don't like the idea of buying him out.  I'm trying to justify what they are thinking...and I'm kinda thinking out loud/thinking as I type this:

-Tuch, Benson, Quinn, Peterka, Greenway are all probably on this team next season on the wing, and not on the 4th line.  Are you planning on one of the young guys here also?  Savoi, Kulich, or Rosen all CAN play wing (and that might be the place to break them into the NHL, not at Center).  Add to that you might bring in a guy for wing via trade or free agency. Skinner, nor any of the above guys are meant for your 4th line (MAYBE Greenway, but I think you are more happy with him on a 3rd line), so that gives you potentially 7 Wingers for your top 3 lines WITHOUT Skinner.

-I know Skinner isn't known for his defense, but he also doesn't make huge giveaways in his own zone (I know, because he often even isn't IN his own zone), and as a 'plus' he is still a 25-30 goal scorer and one of the FEW guys that will go to the net/score goals from there (something Ruff has said he Wants/needs the entire forward team do do better).

Tuch, Quinn, Peterka I think you have pencled in as legitimate scorers on this roster from the wing (at least you are hoping/counting on that).  You need 3 more wingers for those top 3 ilnes.  Between Benson, Greenway, a trade/free agent target, Savoi, Kulich, and Rosen....you have 6 guys there. Can you count on 3 of them (maybe 4 counting for injuries) being BETTER all around players than Skinner?   

I guess that must be what they are thinking (or something similar to it).

For me I still don't like the idea of buying him out. But if they do, and Adams trades for a 20-something year old veteran who you think is going to get over 20 goals for you and play a better 2-way game.....IF, IF that happens, well then OK, buy out Skinner.

[SHAAAUGHT!!!]

Saw this thread earlier and just got a chance to watch Adams talk about Skinner.  My takeaway:

1) KA touches his eyebrow when getting ready to lie, or say something uncomfortable (hard to discern from a small sample size, but my bet is uncomfortable)

2) KA is shopping Skinner and is trying to get his agent to talk Skinner into accepting a move: KA said there was honest communication, he’s easy to communicate with, he’s an elite scorer, respect for player and management

All signs point to buy out or trade, but if he’s spending this much time trying to move him the Sabres might be worried about that 6.5M cap hit in year 3, or the optics of paying Skinner for another 6 years.

I hope my assumptions are right and KA is working hard to move Skinner’s contract in a way that minimizes the long term impact to their cap.  It’s also fun to think how much of this is because Ruff is there and doesn’t want him on the team.  

[dudacek]

29 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

The more I think of this, I can't come off of the fact that I don't like the idea of buying him out.  I'm trying to justify what they are thinking...and I'm kinda thinking out loud/thinking as I type this:

-Tuch, Benson, Quinn, Peterka, Greenway are all probably on this team next season on the wing, and not on the 4th line.  Are you planning on one of the young guys here also?  Savoi, Kulich, or Rosen all CAN play wing (and that might be the place to break them into the NHL, not at Center).  Add to that you might bring in a guy for wing via trade or free agency. Skinner, nor any of the above guys are meant for your 4th line (MAYBE Greenway, but I think you are more happy with him on a 3rd line), so that gives you potentially 7 Wingers for your top 3 lines WITHOUT Skinner.

-I know Skinner isn't known for his defense, but he also doesn't make huge giveaways in his own zone (I know, because he often even isn't IN his own zone), and as a 'plus' he is still a 25-30 goal scorer and one of the FEW guys that will go to the net/score goals from there (something Ruff has said he Wants/needs the entire forward team do do better).

Tuch, Quinn, Peterka I think you have pencled in as legitimate scorers on this roster from the wing (at least you are hoping/counting on that).  You need 3 more wingers for those top 3 ilnes.  Between Benson, Greenway, a trade/free agent target, Savoi, Kulich, and Rosen....you have 6 guys there. Can you count on 3 of them (maybe 4 counting for injuries) being BETTER all around players than Skinner?   

I guess that must be what they are thinking (or something similar to it).

For me I still don't like the idea of buying him out. But if they do, and Adams trades for a 20-something year old veteran who you think is going to get over 20 goals for you and play a better 2-way game.....IF, IF that happens, well then OK, buy out Skinner.

Im going to piggyback off other people’s ideas here:

• Use Skinner buyout savings to add a better Skinner
• Use prime picks/prospects to get a good centre
• Use leftover cap space, more futures to buff out the bottom 6

Giving Lindy something like this:

• Scoring line: Kane Thompson Peterka
• Matchup line: Tuch Ek Greenway
• 2-way line: Quinn Cozens Benson
• Grind line: Trenin Krebs Jeannot

Do I expect it to happen? Of course not, I’m a Sabres fan.

But I can see how the extra $6M and the empty roster spot created by cutting Skinner can open up a lot of exciting options for rosters that look better than they would with him still there.

 

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

Well said

Welcome to the Skinner fan club, new vice president 

The majority of people want to see me impeached. And there is a radical faction that would love to see me hung upside down with a noose around my balls. 😆

A large faction of the same rowdy crowd a few years ago wanted to see Mitts and UPL gone because they fervently believed that they were a lost cause and a drag on the roster. They were wrong. What the both of us are saying is that until there is a better option he adds value to this roster. Right now, flaws and all, he is still one of our best goal scorers. 

[K-9]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The majority of people want to see me impeached. And there is a radical faction that would love to see me hung upside down with a noose around my balls. 😆

A large faction of the same rowdy crowd a few years ago wanted to see Mitts and UPL gone because they fervently believed that they were a lost cause and a drag on the roster. They were wrong. What the both of us are saying is that until there is a better option he adds value to this roster. Right now, flaws and all, he is still one of our best goal scorers. 

In fairness to me and the other doubters at the time, both Mitts and UPL were playing like absolute crap when we made that assessment, so I don’t apologize for it at all. 

[JohnC]

16 minutes ago, K-9 said:

In fairness to me and the other doubters at the time, both Mitts and UPL were playing like absolute crap when we made that assessment, so I don’t apologize for it at all. 

There is no need to apologize for one's assessment. The point I was making that especially with young players such as Mitts, Tage and UPL very often patience is the right course of action. I realize that the Skinner scenario is an altogether different situation. 

[Taro T]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

The comparison between Skinner and Satan don't resonate with me. A couple of years ago, Granato spoke on WGR about Skinner handling his demotion when Krueger was the coach. Clearly, Skinner didn't fit the model of a player he preferred. His minutes and role were severely diminished. The former HC said that after being demoted, Skinner was one of the hardest practice players on the team. The point I'm making is that he's not the type of person who will become a negative influence on the team even when as a player his role is diminished. 

As have said before, would prefer they not buy Skinner out this year.  (Expect it makes more sense next year, though it isn't a given he gets bought out next year.  See almost no way he plays year 8 on the contract here.)  BUT if Ruff doesn't want him for WHATEVER reason - he wants a more 2 way player in his slot, he expects having a veteran that has no idea what his own side of the blue line looks like being a model for the youngest team in the league is a bad idea, he doesn't see Skinner HATING losing, or whatever, then he will be bought out should Adams not be able to convince another GM and Skinner that he'd be a great fit on that other GM's team.

IF Ruff doesn't want Skinner here then the comparison between Satan and Jeff could be extremely apt.  They'd be willing to get rid of him without an obvious replacement for his goals on the roster.

And again, this is SPECULATION.  Said in the B&G I thread, that personally expect he's pencilled in on the 3rd line.  But that was this kid's expectation prior to hearing Adams talk that night.  This morning, Adams literally said a buyout is something they are considering and it's an option that's on the table.  You don't get to that statement without having given it careful consideration and expect that's likely the way you're leaning because if he's here in 3 weeks, they'll have a (can't recall the adjective Adams always uses describing his conversations with his players, but insert that here) conversation about today's press conference.  And the relationship could be significantly damaged by what was said today &/or in that future conversation.

[...]

2 hours ago, K-9 said:

In fairness to me and the other doubters at the time, both Mitts and UPL were playing like absolute crap when we made that assessment, so I don’t apologize for it at all. 

1. Mitts did jack-all in Colorado's playoff run. 
2. Did UPL drag us into the playoffs by sheer will? No.

Using either of these guys as examples of misplaced fan ire is presumptuous.

[dudacek]

The more I think about the way the Skinner leak came out and the way Adams addressed it, the more convinced I am that this was the classic planned leak for preparing the fan base for a controversial decision that has already been made.

He gone.

Like the Mittelstadt deal, for it to make sense, another shoe has to drop.

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

The more I think about the way the Skinner leak came out and the way Adams addressed it, the more convinced I am that this was the classic planned leak for preparing the fan base for a controversial decision that has already been made.

He gone.

Like the Mittelstadt deal, for it to make sense, another shoe has to drop.

Yep.  Hearing Adams response to the Q today, just don't see how Skinner is a Sabre come training camp.

[...]

7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Yep.  Hearing Adams response to the Q today, just don't see how Skinner is a Sabre come training camp.

I just hope it's not a buyout. A trade makes more sense for all parties involved.

[PerreaultForever]

34 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The more I think about the way the Skinner leak came out and the way Adams addressed it, the more convinced I am that this was the classic planned leak for preparing the fan base for a controversial decision that has already been made.

He gone.

Like the Mittelstadt deal, for it to make sense, another shoe has to drop.

Not controversial. Popular. 

Afterwords, somewhere in the world Kreuger will go "now they do it". 

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Not controversial. Popular. 

With some grumpy old obsessives like you and me maybe.

Among the knowledgeable fanbase there is division on that, and those against the move are raising legitimate points: this is bad for the cap down the road; how do we replace the goals; and who do we have that’s better?

For the broader fanbase, Skinner is the guy with the funny videos, cute dimples and those ridiculous goal songs. That get played a lot.

He’s one of the team’s best known and liked players.

[PerreaultForever]

57 minutes ago, dudacek said:

With some grumpy old obsessives like you and me maybe.

Among the knowledgeable fanbase there is division on that, and those against the move are raising legitimate points: this is bad for the cap down the road; how do we replace the goals; and who do we have that’s better?

For the broader fanbase, Skinner is the guy with the funny videos, cute dimples and those ridiculous goal songs. That get played a lot.

He’s one of the team’s best known and liked players.

Oh my such a fierce sideways scratch from kitty. The "knowledgeable" vs. the "grumpy old obsessives" Me-Ow. 

There are fans, and then there are people who understand hockey. They are not always the same. 

But just look over this topic. The vast majority do not want Skinner. There is just argument over this year or next year or lower line etc. There isn't any skepticism or rebuttal over the idea that Ruff might want him gone. Consider that for your knowledge base.